PDA

View Full Version : Duel!!



Muddy17
06-12-2009, 09:25 PM
I see and have also asked which is the best fighter question's.
The way I see it if we are in the VR world then we should ,,,well have a good old fashion Duel.

The only rule's would be,, 25% fuel then one pass head on NO FIRE, then turn and burn baby!!

The fine point's like alt, time weather are up to the pilot's.

Year ago in another Sim this was a test of one pilot VS another.
myself in a 51 vs anyone in the world flying anything in the game would not do right by the aircraft. But would be fun.

Let me know what you think??
Muddy

Viper2005_
06-12-2009, 09:51 PM
Pointless.

You have contrived a set of rules which take genuine pilot ability out of the equation.

Good pilots win by attacking an opponent who has inferior SA from a superior position, usually with overwhelming fire-power. They generally kill the other guy before he even knows he is in trouble.

If you impose rules upon aerial combat then it simply ceases to be aerial combat.

Basically, what you're saying is "Spitfires at dawn!".

Personally, as a 190 driver, I spend my time avoiding this scenario. I fly fast, I avoid fair fights, and I kill targets. I fight on my terms, not those of my opponent. I take head-on shots, not because I'll win, but because this forces my opponent to adopt unfavourable geometry, which makes life easier for me a few moves down the line.

Of course, if my opponent is an idiot then he'll encounter a whole load of 20 mm love to the face, which will generally end the fight before it has begun.

If you want to engage in competition aerobatics then that's fine, but you shouldn't confuse that with aerial combat.

Aerial combat is like a street mugging. One minute you're walking along minding your own business, and the next, you're on the floor in a whole world of hurt.

Fair fights only exist in movies.

The sad fact is that losers cry about the rules. Winners are too busy "dealing" with the prom queen to care.

Here endeth the lesson.

Muddy17
06-12-2009, 10:59 PM
boy thats a lot of typen to say your not in..

If you dont think you can shoot down someone after "1" pass ..well give the plane back to your sister man.

Trefle
06-12-2009, 11:05 PM
I'm not a fan of those duels anymore , although i used to do it quite alot with squadmates in the past , but it certainly requires some serious skills and knowledge of your a/c if you want to compete with the best flyers at this exercise .

Fair enough , a Jug or 190 drivers gets nothing from it , but thing is , pilots rarely had the luxury to choose their aircraft during WWII , every pilot would have wanted one of the fastest plane very good at all altitudes with great firepower , but some got to fly the Zero or Ki-43 , others the Yak or LaGG , others the Hurricanes , Brewsters , I-16 , Morane , P-36 etc... and in these kind of planes , it's not always "the ideal scenario" where you get to dive at the ennemy , make your pass and go home by firewalling the throttle or merely diving , particularly if the odds are against you , for instance if one of your comrade's life is at stake and needs help badly , if you are outnumbered or suprised by ennemies coming out of clouds or the sun during a bomber escort at low altitude ..

In some cases , you can end up in situations where you are forced to get into a dogfight at slow to medium speed , and these skills that you refine at duelling can save your life more often than not , also IMHO you deffo need a good SA to come out on top in these duels , particularly 2vs2 , now of course there is more to being a good pilot than excelling at slow/medium speed low altitude dogfights , but if you 're damn good at this , that's a good beggining if you ask me (improves confidence and gunnery also, well it did for me back then ) , cause that means you know a bit about what your plane can and cannot do in these cirumstances .

It reminds me Max Helmut Ostermann who used to dogfight with I-16 down low in his 109F4 (got killed in one of those duels when outnumbered if i remember well ) or H.J Marseille who used to do the same against Hurris and P-40's also in his F4 , these 2 aces could do that cause they were particularly skilled and confident about their abilities and plane

Muddy17
06-12-2009, 11:33 PM
You guys do realize you are playing a game right??

Just for S*^ts and giggles ??

And I have never on line in the creation of this game seen this,{ have the original box from IL-2 CD and all} I offer it up from Falcon 4 with my sqaud mates. It was always fun but it was always F-16's, here it can be alot more.

Skip the "REAL WORLD CRAP" because none of you have ever "BEEN THERE DONE THAT"
and the only info on the aircraft comes from grampa's fading memory or Janes books etc!!
The contraversies will still be there.

What we have is what Oleg has given us
All im giving is just A GAME!!

Just a thought, if you dont like then dont reply
Muddy

Trefle
06-12-2009, 11:48 PM
And if i like it , can i post ? http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-happy.gif

I don't understand why you say this mate but nevermind , there is nothing in the few posts in this thread suggesting that someone cannot distinguish virtuality from real life ...

But basically someone saying that he thinks those duels are useless to improve your skills as a pilot in this sim/game and me saying that i humbly think it's perhaps not so useless after all cause it helped me at first and can be useful if you fly a/c that like to mix it up down low or aren't very good at higher speeds/alts .. nothing more than that really .. anyway , cheers m8 http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif

Friendly_flyer
06-13-2009, 12:42 AM
In war too, there are situations where you end up fighting at co-altitude, with one, or just a few, opponents on each side. Not all aerial fighting was "street mugging" style, like Viper describe.

So, apart from wishing to be being lucky rather than good anytime, this is the type of fight where the Lavochins, Macchis, Zeros, the Finnish Brewster and of course the Spitfire, shows what's in them. These planes are the classic dogfighters. Such a plane need to be light, accelerate fast, and turn tight. As always, there's the case of knowing your plane, so I'd actually settle for a canon-armed Hurricane, despite it not being the best plane by far.

BillSwagger
06-13-2009, 02:32 AM
I would participate. I'm always looking for 1v1 online but it always turns into 2 or 3 v 1 depending which base we are near.

I like having a good duel just to sharpen up my skills.

What is the purpose of one pass, no fire??
To ensure both players are at equal advantage??

The way i see it, that can limit the tactics used by certain aircraft, but i would still try it out for Sh^^^ and giggles as you say.

orville07
06-13-2009, 05:51 AM
Viper, please try to cheer up mate lol. What you are saying is correct of course, but this is why I hate flying against FW drivers....They are the dullest, most pedantic people on Earth, do everything 'by the book'.....And only 'fly' em because they cannot shoot properly, and are scared of a good old scrap. The ace P-51 and P-47 pilots are the best out there....Much more raw gunnery skill, my Grandmother could get a kill in an Anton! Oooh, controversial!!! LMAO http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-very-happy.gif "But that eeez vy I vin all de time", you might say. Err, ok. Well done. Like the lad says, its only a game. http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_razz.gif

BillSwagger
06-13-2009, 06:14 AM
I would hope that a duel, would bar the use of jets, and fantasy planes, like the do-335 and ta-152.
=))

jayhall0315
06-13-2009, 06:20 AM
I love duels and fight any number of them every week. Dueling teaches you alot about the exact performance envelope of your airframe. One on one dueling also allows you to see the three dimensional mindset of the other guy and how he will respond (or overcome) your combat abilities. It is probably the best activity in IL2 to keep your combat skills sharp or to sharpen them if they are dull (provided your enemies are real trained humans and not the AI, which is miserable).

Some of the very best IL2 pilots that I go against, such as IAF 116~Xcom, FI Gadje, Chimanov, Estor, Ulti, CRO Johnny, either ask for or often fight duels as part of their training. Perhaps that is a bit of a key as to how they maintain their high standards.

Also, dueling really allows you to see peoples patience levels; something sorely lacking in many of the immature fliers using Hyperlobby. If they cant make a kill in their super Spit 25lbs or La7 within 2 minutes, they get bored. Likewise, any match where they really have to face a trained enemy that goes past two minutes or more and they often make a mistake. Sometimes, despite being a virtual world, it's good ole mental toughness that prevails as you wait for a mistake. I have fought some formal duels with a Corsair versus a Zero that lasted over 20 mins as he tried to out turn me and I tried to BnZ on him. Sometimes, the opponent really knows tactics but their own superchiasmatic nucleus gets in the way, and then one silly stall and flop, slows them down enough for a longer than 1 second firing window.

Dueling is a lot like dairy products in the food pyramid. Everyone needs a little daily helping to keep their IL2 skills sharp IMHO.

jayhall0315
06-13-2009, 06:23 AM
Originally posted by BillSwagger:
I would hope that a duel, would bar the use of jets, and fantasy planes, like the do-335 and ta-152.
=))

A duel with jets can at the higher levels become a real test of who can manage energy the best. It is more difficult to do this with jets as the approaching firing windows are typically ~700 ms or less compared to often 1.5 sec or greater for props. Energy usage and vector matching must be very precise for one high level jet pilot to overcome another and extend the critical firing window.

raaaid
06-13-2009, 06:56 AM
duels are bad tactic though i love them

i search for duel now with head on and retire on a 190

DuxCorvan
06-13-2009, 08:00 AM
Originally posted by Trefle:
Fair enough , a Jug or 190 drivers gets nothing from it , but thing is , pilots rarely had the luxury to choose their aircraft during WWII

But they had the luxury to choose the tactics that best fitted those aircraft.

Obligatory TnB without the benefits of surprise or accumulated energy is simply I-153P always FTW.

It does not prove anything. Still fun, though.

general_kalle
06-13-2009, 08:55 AM
Originally posted by Viper2005_:
Pointless.

You have contrived a set of rules which take genuine pilot ability out of the equation.

Good pilots win by attacking an opponent who has inferior SA from a superior position, usually with overwhelming fire-power. They generally kill the other guy before he even knows he is in trouble.

If you impose rules upon aerial combat then it simply ceases to be aerial combat.

Basically, what you're saying is "Spitfires at dawn!".

Personally, as a 190 driver, I spend my time avoiding this scenario. I fly fast, I avoid fair fights, and I kill targets. I fight on my terms, not those of my opponent. I take head-on shots, not because I'll win, but because this forces my opponent to adopt unfavourable geometry, which makes life easier for me a few moves down the line.

Of course, if my opponent is an idiot then he'll encounter a whole load of 20 mm love to the face, which will generally end the fight before it has begun.

If you want to engage in competition aerobatics then that's fine, but you shouldn't confuse that with aerial combat.

Aerial combat is like a street mugging. One minute you're walking along minding your own business, and the next, you're on the floor in a whole world of hurt.

Fair fights only exist in movies.

The sad fact is that losers cry about the rules. Winners are too busy "dealing" with the prom queen to care.

Here endeth the lesson.

Heard
+1

Aviar
06-13-2009, 09:55 AM
Originally posted by Muddy17:
I see and have also asked which is the best fighter question's.
The way I see it if we are in the VR world then we should ,,,well have a good old fashion Duel.

The only rule's would be,, 25% fuel then one pass head on NO FIRE, then turn and burn baby!!

The fine point's like alt, time weather are up to the pilot's.

Year ago in another Sim this was a test of one pilot VS another.
myself in a 51 vs anyone in the world flying anything in the game would not do right by the aircraft. But would be fun.

Let me know what you think??
Muddy

If you really believe this, then the only 'true' duel would have each pilot flying the exact same plane. Think about it.

(Imagine a real duel where one man had a pistol and the other had a sword. Even if the guy with the sword wins, what does it prove? It proves that maybe he's great with a sword, but with a pistol he may have gotten his head blown off. So in the end, nothing is really proven, except that the winner is proficient with his/her weapon.)

It's not a true duel unless both sides have the same weapon.

**Rant Mode Off**

Aviar

DKoor
06-13-2009, 10:05 AM
Originally posted by BillSwagger:
I would hope that a duel, would bar the use of jets, and fantasy planes, like the do-335 and ta-152.
=)) Hey mate I'm not nitpicking, but Do-335 and especially TA-152 are not fantasy planes.
I specifically remember reading about how on one occasion one TA-152 shot down a RAF Tempest after hectic low alt dogfight.
Also, Do-335 flew in the WW2 too...

http://www.cockpitinstrumente.de/Flugzeuge/J%E4ger/Ta125/ta152-4.jpg

http://www.kheichhorn.de/assets/images/do335-002.jpg

Trefle
06-13-2009, 10:13 AM
Originally posted by DuxCorvan:
It does not prove anything. Still fun, though.
I agree with you mate , that's why i said that there is more to being a good pilot than excelling at low altitude low to medium speed dogfight , but the question is : does it help you to improve a bit your knowledge of your aircraft and your skills with it ? my answer is yes , it's better than not duelling at all IMHO although i respect other's views .

Aviar , these duels are usually with the same plane or planes very close in performances , otherwise it's less interesting , the interest is limited when a/c are different as you said , when both pilots have more or less or exactly the same enveloppe and engine , only skills , energy management , gunnery etc can make the difference .

I don't think duellers aren't aware that it's just a part of a virtual pilot's training , i mean it's like a Boxer , it's not because he can punch the punching ball fast and powerfully that he will be able to take a beating on the ring and manage to hit his opponent consistently , but it's just part of his training to practice against punching balls , maybe it's not a good example though http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

DKoor
06-13-2009, 10:26 AM
Hey Trefle if you're interested particularly in dogfights in IL-2 IMHO you should visit http://www.esl.eu/eu/il2/download/ and download some tracks you will see some fine action 1v1 and 2v2 http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_cool.gif .

Trefle
06-13-2009, 10:31 AM
Thank you DKoor , that's kind of you http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

Jaws2002
06-13-2009, 11:51 AM
Originally posted by Muddy17:


Skip the "REAL WORLD CRAP" because none of you have ever "BEEN THERE DONE THAT"
and the only info on the aircraft comes from grampa's fading memory or Janes books etc!!


Actually you are wrong.
We had the honour to "fly" for quite a few years with a genuine WW2 P-47 veteran.
"Reall world crap" as you call it. http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/51.gif
He flew P-47's over the chanel, scored, two real Bf-109 kills, and flew lots of missions over ocupied Europe.
He is no longer with us. http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-sad.gif
R.I.P Mr. MonroeQ http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-sad.gif

ImMoreBetter
06-13-2009, 12:13 PM
Originally posted by Muddy17:
You guys do realize you are playing a game right??

Just for S*^ts and giggles ??

Skip the "REAL WORLD CRAP" because none of you have ever "BEEN THERE DONE THAT"
and the only info on the aircraft comes from grampa's fading memory or Janes books etc!!

Do you realize what message board you are on, right?

DKoor
06-13-2009, 12:22 PM
Originally posted by DKoor:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by BillSwagger:
I would hope that a duel, would bar the use of jets, and fantasy planes, like the do-335 and ta-152.
=)) Hey mate I'm not nitpicking, but Do-335 and especially TA-152 are not fantasy planes.
I specifically remember reading about how on one occasion one TA-152 shot down a RAF Tempest after hectic low alt dogfight.
Also, Do-335 flew in the WW2 too...

http://www.cockpitinstrumente....er/Ta125/ta152-4.jpg (http://www.cockpitinstrumente.de/Flugzeuge/J%E4ger/Ta125/ta152-4.jpg)

http://www.kheichhorn.de/assets/images/do335-002.jpg </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Here it is... I found it, it is an excerpt from Osprey's Focke Wulf Aces of the Western Front;
http://i119.photobucket.com/albums/o125/DKoor/ww2/osprey_fw190aceswf_ta152_excerpt_1.gif
http://i119.photobucket.com/albums/o125/DKoor/ww2/osprey_fw190aceswf_ta152_excerpt_2.gif

Waldo.Pepper
06-13-2009, 01:10 PM
More non-fantasy planes -

This one has 16 kills during the war. Including one on film

http://www.xs4all.nl/~robdebie/me163/images/large/ghin05.jpg

Or this one also with one kill. And a favorite of mine.

http://www.luftwaffepics.com/LCBW/He162-5s.jpg

BillSwagger
06-13-2009, 03:04 PM
I'm not looking for an argument, i'm simply questioning how you would/ could accurately model an airplane with such a brief history on how it flew.

The Do-335 was test flown, but never saw combat before the end of the war.
All eleven that were built, were scrapped by US forces, so they weren't flown in '46.

The Ta-152h1 was a real fighter, but encounters were still very rare. I just don't think there is enough input on either planes flight characteristics, and combat tendencies, to model them accurately. Could they snap roll and not lose or damage their long wings??
Both planes absorb gunfire, including cannons, to the point of absurdity.
These are aspects that push the plane into fantasy, IMO.

If they are included as an option in a duel, so be it, i just thought i would add that there are a handful of allied planes designed to compete with these planes that aren't in the game. P-47N,M and P-51H to name a couple.

DKoor
06-13-2009, 03:30 PM
Originally posted by BillSwagger:
I'm not looking for an argument, i'm simply questioning how you would/ could accurately model an airplane with such a brief history on how it flew.

The Do-335 was test flown, but never saw combat before the end of the war.
All eleven that were built, were scrapped by US forces, so they weren't flown in '46.

The Ta-152h1 was a real fighter, but encounters were still very rare. I just don't think there is enough input on either planes flight characteristics, and combat tendencies, to model them accurately. Could they snap roll and not lose or damage their long wings??
Both planes absorb gunfire, including cannons, to the point of absurdity.
These are aspects that push the plane into fantasy, IMO.

If they are included as an option in a duel, so be it, i just thought i would add that there are a handful of allied planes designed to compete with these planes that aren't in the game. P-47N,M and P-51H to name a couple.
From various internet sources.

------------------------------------------------

Do-335
Delivery commenced in January 1945. When the United States Army overran the Oberpfaffenhofen factory in late April 1945, only 11 Do 335A-1 single-seat fighter-bombers and two Do 335A-12 trainers had been completed.

------------------------------------------------

TA-152
The first Ta 152H entered service with the Luftwaffe in January 1945, but only some 43 production aircraft were delivered until the end of the war[1]. This was too late to allow the Ta 152 to have a significant impact on the war effort.

------------------------------------------------

P-47M entered service with the 56th Fighter Group, based at Boxted, in early 1945. By that point the 56th FG was the only fighter group in the 8th Fighter Command still using the P-47. The P-47M was not used against the V-1 flying bombs, as is often stated – that campaign was already over by the time it entered service. It is possible that the three YP-47M pre-production aircraft were shipped to England to serve in this capacity, thus explaining the later confusion.

The P-47M suffered from a series of problems. The new engine was particularly problematic – at one point every engine in use was withdrawn and replaced by new units. It also has much shorter range than the P-47D.

It did not enter active service until April 1945, too late to make a significant contribution to the war.

------------------------------------------------

P-47N was deployed only in Pacific Theater of
war.

------------------------------------------------

P-51H was too late to see action in the war in Europe. By the late summer of 1945, some P-51Hs had been issued to a few operational units. These units were in the process of working up to operational status when the war in the Pacific ended with the Japanese surrender. None had the opportunity to see any combat.

------------------------------------------------

So to summarize... you want three fighters to oppose two "fantasy" Luftwaffe fighters of which only one type actually saw service in Europe for whole one month after being put on hold before engine troubles were solved (April, and war was over by May 8th), while other two types never entered that Theater of combat and fought in PTO?

As far as Do-335 not being in combat;
From Wikipedia;
French ace Pierre Clostermann claims[1] the first Allied combat encounter with a Pfeil in April 1945. Leading a flight of four Hawker Tempests from No. 3 Squadron RAF over northern Germany, he intercepted a lone Do 335 flying at maximum speed at treetop level. Detecting the British aircraft, the German pilot reversed course to evade. Despite the Tempest's considerable speed, the RAF fighters were not able to catch up or even get into firing position.

------------------------------------------------



So... I don't quite get where you aim at.
Especially your remark how they absorb damage to the point of absurdity... well isn't really worth commenting; I'll just say that I witnessed Tempest online receiving 8 Mk108 shells and still airborne albeit heavy damaged, P-47 isn't much "better" either.

BillSwagger
06-13-2009, 04:17 PM
noted:

It is argumentative to discuss the damage absorbed by airplanes, but it has been a consistent observation of mine. Not some fluke occurrence.

The P-47 was a historically tough plane. What evidence is there that a Ta can absorb the damage that it does??

and thats my point...its very limited because of the brief and limited history of the aircraft.

I remember reading the P-51H did see combat in WW2, i dont have the time to dig it up now, but probably to the same extent that the Do-335 you have shown.
I'm not trying to exclude planes on the basis they never saw combat, i'm saying that the modeling of such planes is much more speculative than planes that flew for more than a brief period ending the war.

Furthermore, by not including the later variants of the 47, and 51 that could've/ would've competed better with these planes
adds to the hype.

If the YP-80 was included, but the me-262 was not, you would probably be in my position. Its no where near an equal comparison, but i think you can see my point.



anyway,,,,=)


if you want to duel that's fine.

Bremspropeller
06-13-2009, 04:21 PM
The P-47_Late we have kind of simulates the P-47M.

BillSwagger
06-13-2009, 04:33 PM
Originally posted by Bremspropeller:
The P-47_Late we have kind of simulates the P-47M.

Except the M climbed at a rate of 4000-4400 ft per minute (loaded, clean wings), and had a much higher top speed at altitude than the D-27.

P-47D-30 was a significant plane, and is probably more equivalent. They wont call it a P-47D 30 because it doesn't have the dorsal fin on the tail.

Id also be careful of using wiki to site sources. I found some things they report easily debunked by further research.

Muddy17
06-13-2009, 04:40 PM
Ya ok Im sorry about the "real world crap" statment,, Sometimes these boards go on and on about reality etc and the arguing can get to be a little silly sometimes.
Sorry if I offended anyone.

As for another couple of questions,, I realize the different types of aircraft instead of the same kind being questionable but what the heck.

If two Pilots go head to head best out of three we will start to get a real picture of which plane is superior over time.

As for the no guns on first pass, well.. if your gunned down without a turn then it would be kind of lame.Would think the Jug or FW 190 would destroy all on the first pass.

Once again I retract the comment from last night.
Muddy

STENKA_69.GIAP
06-13-2009, 04:44 PM
What we are talking about here is sport.

In the www.69giap.com (http://www.69giap.com) we run a dogfight ladder.

Same plane, same height, first pass then game on.

When you play it the adrenaline gushes...

Look on the left hand menu for dogfight ladder

Bremspropeller
06-13-2009, 04:44 PM
I'm not talking about the D-27.
I'm talking about the "P-47_Late".
It uses the D-27's 3d-model, but it uses a different deafult-skin.

Engadin
06-13-2009, 04:46 PM
Originally posted by Muddy17:
I see and have also asked which is the best fighter question's.
The way I see it if we are in the VR world then we should ,,,well have a good old fashion Duel.

The only rule's would be,, 25% fuel then one pass head on NO FIRE, then turn and burn baby!!

The fine point's like alt, time weather are up to the pilot's.

Year ago in another Sim this was a test of one pilot VS another.
myself in a 51 vs anyone in the world flying anything in the game would not do right by the aircraft. But would be fun.

Let me know what you think??
Muddy

Sun Tzu, "The art of war", says 'if you get to the combat field on an equal footing with your rival, it only means that you haven't prepared yourself well enough'.

BillSwagger
06-13-2009, 04:52 PM
As for the no guns on first pass, well.. if your gunned down without a turn then it would be kind of lame.Would think the Jug or FW 190 would destroy all on the first pass.



I see. Well...where and when??
I'll be flying a Jug.

Muddy17
06-13-2009, 04:58 PM
Ya "SPORT" Im going to poke my head in to HL tonight about 8pm central time and be on TS channel for Skies of fire if anyone is in.
We can work out the fine points and have a few best out of 3 matches.
Cant serve though cant figure out how from behind a router.

Muddy17
06-13-2009, 05:00 PM
By the way,, you all probably kick my but lol.
See ya there.

BillSwagger
06-13-2009, 05:06 PM
Depending on the map, it is possible to meet at a spot away from the action and interference of other pilots, but it doesn't ensure there wouldn't be any interference when in route.

Unless someone can provide a server, which would be optimal, that's probably the way i would do it.

Muddy17
06-13-2009, 05:09 PM
That would be ideal. Like two pilots jump in one of the COOP spaces and go right.

DKoor
06-13-2009, 05:34 PM
Originally posted by BillSwagger:
noted:

It is argumentative to discuss the damage absorbed by airplanes, but it has been a consistent observation of mine. Not some fluke occurrence.

The P-47 was a historically tough plane. What evidence is there that a Ta can absorb the damage that it does??

and thats my point...its very limited because of the brief and limited history of the aircraft.

I remember reading the P-51H did see combat in WW2, i dont have the time to dig it up now, but probably to the same extent that the Do-335 you have shown.
I'm not trying to exclude planes on the basis they never saw combat, i'm saying that the modeling of such planes is much more speculative than planes that flew for more than a brief period ending the war.

Furthermore, by not including the later variants of the 47, and 51 that could've/ would've competed better with these planes
adds to the hype.

If the YP-80 was included, but the me-262 was not, you would probably be in my position. Its no where near an equal comparison, but i think you can see my point.



anyway,,,,=)


if you want to duel that's fine.

If you didn't found the 10 minutes of your time to google the info for the P-47M/N & P-51H fighters, I salute you for at least being honest in your post.

In my case it was never ever;

If the YP-80 was included, but the me-262 was not, you would probably be in my position. Its no where near an equal comparison, but i think you can see my point.
...true. But yes I can see your point.

Do I want these 3 planes you mentioned in game?
Yes, why not.

I also never fully understood why anyone could fancy the idea of including the flying ***** which Lerche is in game and several others what if planes, and not including cockpit for B5N Kate, Avenger, Hs-129 cockpit, Devastator model, Ki-44, Do-17 and few other notable planes. These are theater essentials... let alone few useful additions like Typhoon, Lancaster...
But they are in and that's end of story...

My point of the whole story... I will never let myself looking on the issues from either camp, red or blue... TBH I find it really childish, no offense... if you think that I vouch for the blues, you are wrong. Very.

VW-IceFire
06-13-2009, 05:41 PM
Originally posted by BillSwagger:
I'm not looking for an argument, i'm simply questioning how you would/ could accurately model an airplane with such a brief history on how it flew.

The Do-335 was test flown, but never saw combat before the end of the war.
All eleven that were built, were scrapped by US forces, so they weren't flown in '46.

The Ta-152h1 was a real fighter, but encounters were still very rare. I just don't think there is enough input on either planes flight characteristics, and combat tendencies, to model them accurately. Could they snap roll and not lose or damage their long wings??
Both planes absorb gunfire, including cannons, to the point of absurdity.
These are aspects that push the plane into fantasy, IMO.

If they are included as an option in a duel, so be it, i just thought i would add that there are a handful of allied planes designed to compete with these planes that aren't in the game. P-47N,M and P-51H to name a couple.
I don't really see these as being any different than any of the other types we have in the game. Old interviews with Oleg seem to suggest that they have a two stage process when they put together the basics of the flight model for each plane. First they plug in all of the various important numbers and then they go through as many historical documents as possible and make minor tweaks to model each types idiosyncrasies - it doesn't sound like they spend much time on this mind you.

So even with a type that saw limited use there are test pilot reports and combat reports which are enough to get the feeling part right. The numbers part is, as I see it, relatively easy so long as you have the data on hand. Its mostly a science and a little bit of an art. So maybe the Do-335 doesn't have as many combat reports to go on...it did fly and its characteristics are not a surprise. Not any more so than a Mustang or a Spitfire.

I also don't think the 152H's wings were a problem. For one because I think Kurt Tank's group knew what they were doing in terms of the engineering and two because we know 152H's engaged Tempests and other types in the last months and often came out the victor in some serious battles (in at least one case the pilots reported they fought 109Es but were actually 152H's).

So I don't think these are any different than anything else we have. Fantasy types are the He-162C and D models or the Heinkel Lerche. Even the 1946 types on the Russian side aren't really fantasy as the majority flew in squadron service and have recorded performances.

Wildnoob
06-13-2009, 06:09 PM
the FW-190 feature very good armor protection in general. as a derivated version of the FW-190, I don't think that the TA-152 is a plane could not be able to take heavy punishment, actually I think that it was a plane with a radial engine good armor protection, and so have much confidance that could absorve many damage. but THINK is useless, LOGIC. I will conduct a research now about armor protection for the FW-190 series and the TA-152. soon will be posting the material here.

BillSwagger
06-13-2009, 06:18 PM
Originally posted by DKoor:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by BillSwagger:
noted:

It is argumentative to discuss the damage absorbed by airplanes, but it has been a consistent observation of mine. Not some fluke occurrence.

The P-47 was a historically tough plane. What evidence is there that a Ta can absorb the damage that it does??

and thats my point...its very limited because of the brief and limited history of the aircraft.

I remember reading the P-51H did see combat in WW2, i dont have the time to dig it up now, but probably to the same extent that the Do-335 you have shown.
I'm not trying to exclude planes on the basis they never saw combat, i'm saying that the modeling of such planes is much more speculative than planes that flew for more than a brief period ending the war.

Furthermore, by not including the later variants of the 47, and 51 that could've/ would've competed better with these planes
adds to the hype.

If the YP-80 was included, but the me-262 was not, you would probably be in my position. Its no where near an equal comparison, but i think you can see my point.



anyway,,,,=)


if you want to duel that's fine.

If you didn't found the 10 minutes of your time to google the info for the P-47M/N & P-51H fighters, I salute you for at least being honest in your post.

In my case it was never ever;

If the YP-80 was included, but the me-262 was not, you would probably be in my position. Its no where near an equal comparison, but i think you can see my point.
...true. But yes I can see your point.

Do I want these 3 planes you mentioned in game?
Yes, why not.

I also never fully understood why anyone could fancy the idea of including the flying ***** which Lerche is in game and several others what if planes, and not including cockpit for B5N Kate, Avenger, Hs-129 cockpit, Devastator model, Ki-44, Do-17 and few other notable planes. These are theater essentials... let alone few useful additions like Typhoon, Lancaster...
But they are in and that's end of story...

My point of the whole story... I will never let myself looking on the issues from either camp, red or blue... TBH I find it really childish, no offense... if you think that I vouch for the blues, you are wrong. Very. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>


lol...flying *****...lol


Aside from being childish, its also irrelevant.
I was simply identifying equal match ups, because i find that what i refer to as "fantasy" aircraft lacking some authenticity, and their counterparts from the same time period were not included in the game.

You've also made other great points regarding what they chose to include and not include, but in the end it is what we are left with so its up to the players to not fly such garbage....lol. To each is their own.

Another thing to recognize, is that no one here is stupid. We are all well read, and i would hope that most of our knowledge goes beyond a brief google search. I respect everyone's POV and if i can learn from the discussion i think its great.

Wildnoob
06-13-2009, 06:18 PM
"Armor on the FW-190 is located in the following areas: the pilot is protected by the engine and 60 mm armored glass. Nose of the plane enclosing the oil radiator is made of 5 mm armored plate; the rest of the nose is 3 mm armor.

There is also an 8 mm armored seat that covers the pilot up to the shoulder level. There is an indent in the sear for the parachute. A 5 mm armored plate behind the pilot seat fills the full fuselage profile except the area for the parachute indent. 12 mm headrest protects pilot’s head and shoulders. There is no armor protecting pilot from the side or below."

source: http://luthier.stormloader.com/SFTacticsIII.htm

there's a image in the link from the location of the armor points in the aicraft.

ok, is a fact that many FW-190s in the western front where add aditional armor for protection against the massive defensive guns from allied bomber aircraft.

I need to conduct more research about the P-47 and the TA-152, this link I posted is just a example, not the material I want.

but in IL2, I LOVE the FW-190 ability to take punishment. as the times I used as used it as jabo figther (figther bomber) many times I could apreciate it's ability to absorve damage, as well as in the air really. on this sim at least, I feel myself very well protected inside a FW-190. anyway, I need find informations for my argumentation, because I think that the TA-152 was a very though plane and with sure in my view Kurt Tank wouldn't never (this is simple against the logic) make a more fragile plane, even that he know that as a high altitude interceptor, the TA-152 was most intended to be used against the allied heavy bombers, and that means the plane would need to be able to absorve damage, because one of the it's major treats is that would be a lot of defensive fire coming from enemy from the bombers. anyway, I already talked too much, later I will back with some sources about this subject.

DKoor
06-13-2009, 06:36 PM
Yeah, those FW-190(A8) Sturmbocks that were extra armoured for gung-ho group attacks on allied bomber streams had those extra armour working like a double edged sword with or vs them...
They were indeed heavier (some 400lb = 180kg) than a 'normal' FW-190, thus effectively making them poor for fighter vs fighter type of combat... their maneuver was sluggish and pretty much all other chars except probably dive http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif .
I've read some stuff of their tactic and I must say that those were quite brutal techniques where at one point they would just mass up on one bomber everyone would take aim at some point on bomber and they would fire all together... their FW-190A8's were also equipped with Mk108 cannons (3cm).

BillSwagger
06-13-2009, 06:37 PM
It is my understanding that some variants of the 190 had heavier undercarriages, which were better suited for ground attack purposes and helped with protecting damage from AA or below.

In general, "armor" refers to protecting the pilot and engine.

Interestingly, the FW and Ta series aren't difficult to damage if i can place shots on the engine. Whats noticeably wrong, is attacking from their six, where most shots are hitting the tail and wings.

DKoor
06-13-2009, 06:46 PM
FW-190 or TA-152 have quite poor flying characteristics after being hit in the wings... if you can land a few shots on their wings, its pilot will struggle to keep it where he wants. Of course after that he is little more than a target to his oppo.
Some folks said that FW-190 also losses huge amount of speed when hit in wings (all what is considered to be "light" damage mind you).
How true is that I don't know, I never really specifically tested that.

Planes like P-47 and P-51 are in somewhat advantageous position here vs FW-190; while FW-190 is good in taking damage it certainly isn't good as those two mentioned in trim out the battle damage.

That effectively means, that if you fly a P-51 and are hit in wing, your fighter naturally wants to fly on either side much more than usual, but you can give it aileron & rudder trim and compensate damage to a good degree. It is not possible to do that on FW-190 simply because it has only elevator trim (Bf-109 too), so you will need to constantly battle with the controls for the remainder of your flight, meaning also that you will be slower than what you would be if you could trim it out.

BillSwagger
06-13-2009, 07:05 PM
What comes to mind is the countless times i've been dragged down to deck on the tail of an FW/TA and they are still noticeably maneuverable despite high hit counts on the wings and/or tail.

Then one hit later the whole wing breaks off or a fire starts. If i didn't get that one last shot, they could easily fly away and even present a threat to me. So there seems to be a threshold that allows for exceptional flight or destruction of the plane.

When engaging, i've learned to aim for the engine because hitting the tail and wings usually leads to a longer drawn out chase.

Muddy17
06-13-2009, 07:08 PM
Ok as for witch aircraft it is as simple as the two parties pick a year.. then if you agree to 1944 then ME 262 VS AM-7 ,,not much to worry about as long as all parties agre prior to start.

Muddy17
06-13-2009, 07:10 PM
What I guess im trying to say is if your opponent picks a vastly inferior airframe, thats his problem,, but if you cruse on him and he wins.LOL time to eat crow.

Wildnoob
06-13-2009, 07:28 PM
DKoor, I think that if you have pedals and keep push a little the rudder from the opositive side of the damage this can be compensate.

but I will test out this, altough as you say this, I will not contest you, never. but anyway the airelon and rudder trim with sure are a nice edge that the P-51 and P-47 have in comparison with the FW-190/TA-152 in such terms.

AnaK774
06-14-2009, 12:40 AM
As jayhall stated, cold initial pass merge duels are good for getting knowing of your plane, your wingmans combat tendensies...

Although I prefer staying out of fair fights, its good to keep your skills well honed out for that occasion when do-do hits fan and you really need em...

idonno
06-14-2009, 02:04 AM
Originally posted by Muddy17:
You guys do realize you are playing a game right??


SACRILEGE!!

BAN HIM NOW!!

Where are the moderators when you need them? http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-wink.gif

M_Gunz
06-14-2009, 07:54 AM
Originally posted by Muddy17:
Ok as for witch aircraft it is as simple as the two parties pick a year.. then if you agree to 1944 then ME 262 VS AM-7 ,,not much to worry about as long as all parties agre prior to start.

There are some planes identified with the wrong year. 41 Spit VB has mid-42 engine posted by Oleg just to start.
La5FN we have year is questionable as well. For sure there's others and threads debating those.
It's not clear cut.

deepo_HP
06-14-2009, 06:11 PM
Originally posted by BillSwagger:
I was simply identifying equal match ups, because i find that what i refer to as "fantasy" aircraft lacking some authenticity, and their counterparts from the same time period were not included in the game.


you can find a listing of do-335 (not) produced here:
production list (http://www.aeroflight.co.uk/types/germany/dornier/do_335/d335prod.htm).

the planning and testing happened over quite a longer time-span and the often '11 scrapped'-quote is just what it is: the number of planes standing in the hall... it is not the number of planes built or flown.

however, for sure it is not a plane of any relevance concerning war events. but it is anything but a 'fantasy' plane lacking authenticity! it has been tested, flown and been on the production line.
i am personally less interested in actual combat comparison than in technical characteristics. to simulate combat, a ladder might be interesting (or this sim in general)... for the flight-model, i think, there are perhaps enough data from rechlin and field-testing during 11 months pre-production to have it accurate.

even if i am not fancy of the do-335, i also liked the decision to put it into the game more than any late p-51 and/or p-47. it is far more interesting to have a quite unusual and different concept represented than just a further development of types already available in several versions - and wouldn't add much to the game. where i don't care, if they missed or not missed a certain date of introduction.

na85
06-14-2009, 07:06 PM
The rules presented by Muddy will not show you who is a better fighter pilot.

To determine who is a better pilot you must be flying the same aircraft as your opponent, with the same fuel, ammo, and weapons state (i.e. start on completely equal footing).

None of this stupid "one pass" business. Start on the ground and when it says go you're clear to take off.

Even then, though, you're really only testing who's more familiar with that particular aircraft type.

A true test of airmanship is 2v2. 1v1 fights without a wingman are fairly useless for evaluation purposes because quite frankly if you find yourself without a wingman you deserve to get shot down.

Muddy17
06-14-2009, 09:53 PM
When I state one pass it is mearly to merge the fighters after an airstart in close proximity so as to speed things up..Take off climb out and serch and destroy would take more time than three quick duels, and I also said nothing about the pilots but the airframes,, lots of people will state there opinion of the best plane {IN THE GAME,, NOT HISTORIC..] but if there was some people involved a general picture would develope


in any case it seems more people are of the mindset that "if it really didnt happen then it cant now", so ill drop the subject and move on
Muddy

BillSwagger
06-14-2009, 10:37 PM
i just wanted to have a fun duel in my fav airplane. online i'll be in a good 1v1, but its always broken up by team mates from either side.
I thought a good duel would be a good way to sharpen my skills and see what i need to work on, or even learn something about another type of plane.

What makes, or demonstrates a good pilot is completely subjective.
IMO, better pilots will use their team, not abuse their team.
Better pilots are versatile and can hold their own in several situations, in several types of aircraft, with or with out advantage.

I dont know one pilot in il2, that has never been shot down, so the idea of letting a loss bruise your ego seems absurd.

It is my understanding i can use my IP address and link directly with a player for a duel, with out the need for a server or hyperlobby....right???

BillSwagger
06-14-2009, 11:31 PM
Originally posted by deepo_HP:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by BillSwagger:
I was simply identifying equal match ups, because i find that what i refer to as "fantasy" aircraft lacking some authenticity, and their counterparts from the same time period were not included in the game.


you can find a listing of do-335 (not) produced here:
production list (http://www.aeroflight.co.uk/types/germany/dornier/do_335/d335prod.htm).

the planning and testing happened over quite a longer time-span and the often '11 scrapped'-quote is just what it is: the number of planes standing in the hall... it is not the number of planes built or flown.

however, for sure it is not a plane of any relevance concerning war events. but it is anything but a 'fantasy' plane lacking authenticity! it has been tested, flown and been on the production line.
i am personally less interested in actual combat comparison than in technical characteristics. to simulate combat, a ladder might be interesting (or this sim in general)... for the flight-model, i think, there are perhaps enough data from rechlin and field-testing during 11 months pre-production to have it accurate.

even if i am not fancy of the do-335, i also liked the decision to put it into the game more than any late p-51 and/or p-47. it is far more interesting to have a quite unusual and different concept represented than just a further development of types already available in several versions - and wouldn't add much to the game. where i don't care, if they missed or not missed a certain date of introduction. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

well put.
It is an interesting plane, no doubt.
They probably also didnt include the later variants of the P-51 and 47 because they wanted to focus on the jet aircraft which the Do-335, although prop driven, is near equivalent in performance in some cases. Whats more, its as tough as some mid size bombers. Having no combat history makes one speculate its toughness and weaknesses, so there in lies the fantasy aspect.

I'm not knocking the creators or their research, i'm just not sure how much you can get from a flight test where combat is usually adds more to the picture. Pulling high g turns, rolling or diving traits...certain structural failures. The pros and cons of having another engine....ie more weight in the rear of the craft.

Does it make the game more interesting??..
consider this.
when it comes to a duel, the do-335 outclasses all other prop driven planes, in speed and toughness.
If my opponent were flying a Do-335, then i to would need to fly a Do-335 to compete well with him.

Is that interesting???? or might you want another plane, the P-72, or even if its the speedier, lighter P-51H or faster P-47M to mix it up a bit.

That sounds more interesting...=) IMO...=)

i could go round and round on this, so i will drop it for now.
Still a great game, but leave the Do-335 for jet maps.

DKoor
06-15-2009, 12:15 AM
Hey Bill... if you want to fight a Do-335 in superior aircraft, use Mustang Mk.III.
Mustang isn't as tough as Do-335 but is more maneuverable especially at speed and is also noticeably faster than Do-335 at all alts below 4000m.
I've used Mustang vs Do-335 online and it rocks.

M_Gunz
06-15-2009, 12:26 AM
How many years has it been since the worldwide IL2 competition was held in China?

AnaK774
06-15-2009, 12:34 AM
4?

DKoor
06-15-2009, 12:52 AM
They dropped it after Oleg 'fixed' the Bf-109 prop pitch. http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif

Gadje
06-15-2009, 04:46 AM
Originally posted by Viper2005_:
Pointless.
....Aerial combat is like a street mugging. One minute you're walking along minding your own business, and the next, you're on the floor in a whole world of hurt.

..Fair fights only exist in movies.
..Here endeth the lesson.

And 'by the book' combat situations only exist in the book! http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif (unless everyone chooses to fly that way!). The best pilots I've met online appear to have read the book, know and use it and moved on.

These days in IL-2 the method of combat you describe is commonplace where I fly at least. The overall standard of pilots has improved over the years to the point where average 190 and red energy pilots know and do this well.
But no matter how careful you are you will meet an opponent with similar or better E and when he is in a similarly fast energy plane, what then?

In my experience this is where 1v1 skills come to play for energy pilots too. When two equal energy fighters meet most of the 'by the book' pilots are too passive here, go defensive and unless the attacker decides not to follow will be shot down even if they dive.

Not having experience of flying the plane right on the edge, maneouvring hard while maintaining energy and control gives the predictable, formulaic pilot no option against someone who does know. And the best pilots I've met all do.

1v1 and 2v2's using the same plane teach these skills. Pilots who best maintain their energy win these whatever plane is used, certainly not the guy who yanks his stick hardest http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif.

Far from pointless then I'd say.

Flight_boy1990
06-15-2009, 05:06 AM
Hi Gadje,
i wonder if i'm among those pilots you've met. http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif
(I didn't had TIR at the time http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif )

BillSwagger
06-15-2009, 06:09 AM
Originally posted by Gadje:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Viper2005_:
Pointless.
....Aerial combat is like a street mugging. One minute you're walking along minding your own business, and the next, you're on the floor in a whole world of hurt.

..Fair fights only exist in movies.
..Here endeth the lesson.

And 'by the book' combat situations only exist in the book! http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif (unless everyone chooses to fly that way!). The best pilots I've met online appear to have read the book, know and use it and moved on.

These days in IL-2 the method of combat you describe is commonplace where I fly at least. The overall standard of pilots has improved over the years to the point where average 190 and red energy pilots know and do this well.
But no matter how careful you are you will meet an opponent with similar or better E and when he is in a similarly fast energy plane, what then?

In my experience this is where 1v1 skills come to play for energy pilots too. When two equal energy fighters meet most of the 'by the book' pilots are too passive here, go defensive and unless the attacker decides not to follow will be shot down even if they dive.

Not having experience of flying the plane right on the edge, maneouvring hard while maintaining energy and control gives the predictable, formulaic pilot no option against someone who does know. And the best pilots I've met all do.

1v1 and 2v2's using the same plane teach these skills. Pilots who best maintain their energy win these whatever plane is used, certainly not the guy who yanks his stick hardest http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif.

Far from pointless then I'd say. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>


I know if i were really flying a plane in combat most of the crap i do in game would be out the window. I would not take nearly the same risks and often smarter pilots avoid engaging unless it is their primary objective.

In the game, i find that there is no one maneuver or set of maneuvers that i use. It is really thinking on the ball, and the fundamental strategy i use, is predicting where my opponent(s), and team mates will be so i can position myself to have the most advantage, and/or minimize any advantage my opponent might have or gain in that time. As variables change, so does my thinking, and i adjust my flight path. To stay committed to one maneuver is a sign of newbie-ness.
For example the guy that flys at you head on from 4km, shooting everywhere around you but you.
or....a pilot that takes his plane into a steep climb with the enemy closing in on his tail, yet HE PrOceeds to climb.

There is a definite pattern here, and anyone who plays online can recognize it. NZ

If i could add another 30kph to my planes top speed at anytime, i would, but it would destroy the continuity of the game. Instead i use my knowledge surrounding some flight maneuvers.

Understanding basic flight maneuvers and even the more complex ones, is like broadening your vocabulary. You will have more options or at least be aware of a potential maneuver you or your opponent(s) can perform.

To most, this is second nature, and the level of play i see is still somewhat steller, but there are a handful of pilots that represent a challenge on every server at any time.

Then there are the pilots that really stand out. lol///

mortoma
06-15-2009, 06:41 AM
I'd like to kindly inform Viper that the scenario suggested by the original poster, or at least similar scenarios took place in W.W.I all the time. The practice of enemy aces challenging each other to a duel was of course discontinued by W.W.II era.

jayhall0315
06-15-2009, 06:49 AM
Originally posted by Gadje:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Viper2005_:
Pointless.
....Aerial combat is like a street mugging. One minute you're walking along minding your own business, and the next, you're on the floor in a whole world of hurt.

..Fair fights only exist in movies.
..Here endeth the lesson.

And 'by the book' combat situations only exist in the book! http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif (unless everyone chooses to fly that way!). The best pilots I've met online appear to have read the book, know and use it and moved on.

These days in IL-2 the method of combat you describe is commonplace where I fly at least. The overall standard of pilots has improved over the years to the point where average 190 and red energy pilots know and do this well.
But no matter how careful you are you will meet an opponent with similar or better E and when he is in a similarly fast energy plane, what then?

In my experience this is where 1v1 skills come to play for energy pilots too. When two equal energy fighters meet most of the 'by the book' pilots are too passive here, go defensive and unless the attacker decides not to follow will be shot down even if they dive.

Not having experience of flying the plane right on the edge, maneouvring hard while maintaining energy and control gives the predictable, formulaic pilot no option against someone who does know. And the best pilots I've met all do.

1v1 and 2v2's using the same plane teach these skills. Pilots who best maintain their energy win these whatever plane is used, certainly not the guy who yanks his stick hardest http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif.

Far from pointless then I'd say. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Couldnt agree more. Flying high and smart with ambush tactics is excellent but there is always someone higher or with more E, ... and then what ? If you cannot push your crate right to the limit and are very familar with how to handle yourself when you become tactically cut off, then the next best career in IL2 is bombing http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif

BTW Gadje, always fun to face you, sometimes I live to tell about it, sometimes even a win .... and well, ... sometimes I dont http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif If I dont return after facing you, I always try to tell my friends that my joystick suddenly malfunctioned http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif Amazing how often my joystick seems to malfunction .... hehe

Jaws2002
06-15-2009, 08:34 AM
Originally posted by Gadje:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Viper2005_:
Pointless.
....Aerial combat is like a street mugging. One minute you're walking along minding your own business, and the next, you're on the floor in a whole world of hurt.

..Fair fights only exist in movies.
..Here endeth the lesson.

And 'by the book' combat situations only exist in the book! http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif (unless everyone chooses to fly that way!). The best pilots I've met online appear to have read the book, know and use it and moved on.

These days in IL-2 the method of combat you describe is commonplace where I fly at least. The overall standard of pilots has improved over the years to the point where average 190 and red energy pilots know and do this well.
But no matter how careful you are you will meet an opponent with similar or better E and when he is in a similarly fast energy plane, what then?

In my experience this is where 1v1 skills come to play for energy pilots too. When two equal energy fighters meet most of the 'by the book' pilots are too passive here, go defensive and unless the attacker decides not to follow will be shot down even if they dive.

Not having experience of flying the plane right on the edge, maneouvring hard while maintaining energy and control gives the predictable, formulaic pilot no option against someone who does know. And the best pilots I've met all do.

1v1 and 2v2's using the same plane teach these skills. Pilots who best maintain their energy win these whatever plane is used, certainly not the guy who yanks his stick hardest http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif.

Far from pointless then I'd say. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

+1. http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/25.gif

There's no more free lunch out there. http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-very-happy.gif http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/11.gif A lot better skills compared to 5-6 years ago. http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/11.gif, but from time to time, you still run into some pilots that do it perfectly by the book when they have the energy, but if they messed up one pass and lost the advantage is usually over in two moves.

USArmyAirCorps
06-15-2009, 08:47 AM
Originally posted by orville07:
Viper, please try to cheer up mate lol. What you are saying is correct of course, but this is why I hate flying against FW drivers....They are the dullest, most pedantic people on Earth, do everything 'by the book'.....And only 'fly' em because they cannot shoot properly, and are scared of a good old scrap. The ace P-51 and P-47 pilots are the best out there....Much more raw gunnery skill, my Grandmother could get a kill in an Anton! Oooh, controversial!!! LMAO http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-very-happy.gif "But that eeez vy I vin all de time", you might say. Err, ok. Well done. Like the lad says, its only a game. http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_razz.gif

Plus Five Hundred and Fifty Million!

Mate, you are a wizard with words. Dull, pedantic grandmothers are in fact the types that play with the 190.

Sig material, be sure.

Daiichidoku
06-15-2009, 09:14 AM
just thought id add this tidbit about the Ta 152

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Focke-Wulf_Ta_152

Fuel capacity was 595 L (157 US gal) for the H-0 model, with the option of a 300 L (80 US gal) drop tank on the centerline. The H-1 model carried an additional 454 L (120 US gal) of fuel in six unprotected bag tanks in the wings; typically, one of these tanks was used to hold the MW 50 methanol-water mixture and another for GM-1 nitrous oxide

T_O_A_D
06-15-2009, 10:50 AM
Muddy17

I'm nopt even going to read this whole thread, but if you are interested in this sort of thing, there are a few avenues for you.

One look on the second page of this forum, or my recent post, a guy was posting about an organized Ladder like this.

Or you could look in the the http://www.dangerdogz.com/Comms
Some of us entertain this thing over there.
You can find some of it posted on My You tube. Link is in my sig.

I even have a mission I and Balrog built 6 years or so ago for it.

It's not realistic, but it lets you know if your getting all you can out of a particular air craft when two skilled pilots go head to head in the same ride and load out.

One thing you will not truly know flying it Historically.

Ok off to bed a storm is rolling in.

Viper2005_
06-15-2009, 11:21 AM
Well I see that I've sparked some debate...

IME, 90% or more of fights are won & lost long before aggressive manoeuvring starts. SA, not BFM, is the key to success.

So in answer to questions along the lines of "what happens if you meet somebody with more E than you?", I would answer that if this comes as a shock because of a bounce then you have an SA problem.

OTOH, if you have good SA then you will see the potential threat when it is a dot. This gives you the opportunity to put yourself into a position of advantage, or at least reduced disadvantage.

In the best case, you can transform your initial energy disadvantage into an advantage. More subtly, if you can't achieve this complete reversal of the position, you can put yourself at your optimal altitude.

Given even less time, you can still arrange the geometry so that your opponent has to trade away some of his energy advantage for angles.

This implies some lateral separation which can be turned into the basis for a scissors fight.

However, the fundamental limitation of this sort of defensive position is that whilst you can invite your opponent to make mistakes, you cannot force him to do so.

For this reason, a 1v1 fight between good pilots tend to be somewhat 1 dimensional. Both pilots can give each other their complete attention, and a dry merge means that both pilots should have roughly equal SA. It therefore comes down to extremely heavily optimised BFM - a 1% advantage built up manoeuvre after manoeuvre to produce an eventual victory after perhaps 10-15 minutes of combat, with both players safe in the knowledge that nobody is going to crash the party.

Many v Many is far more interesting IMO because everybody has to assume that their party is about to be crashed. This means that in addition to the obvious BFM fight, there is a continual battle for SA, with all of the participants trading time spent with their eyes on their target against time spent looking for as-yet unseen threats.

Additionally there is also teamwork to consider.

Throw in some ground targets and the game has become considerably more complex. Chess instead of draughts if you will.

jayhall0315
06-15-2009, 01:12 PM
Originally posted by Viper2005_:
Well I see that I've sparked some debate...

IME, 90% or more of fights are won & lost long before aggressive manoeuvring starts. SA, not BFM, is the key to success.

So in answer to questions along the lines of "what happens if you meet somebody with more E than you?", I would answer that if this comes as a shock because of a bounce then you have an SA problem.

OTOH, if you have good SA then you will see the potential threat when it is a dot. This gives you the opportunity to put yourself into a position of advantage, or at least reduced disadvantage.

In the best case, you can transform your initial energy disadvantage into an advantage. More subtly, if you can't achieve this complete reversal of the position, you can put yourself at your optimal altitude.

Given even less time, you can still arrange the geometry so that your opponent has to trade away some of his energy advantage for angles.

This implies some lateral separation which can be turned into the basis for a scissors fight.

However, the fundamental limitation of this sort of defensive position is that whilst you can invite your opponent to make mistakes, you cannot force him to do so.

For this reason, a 1v1 fight between good pilots tend to be somewhat 1 dimensional. Both pilots can give each other their complete attention, and a dry merge means that both pilots should have roughly equal SA. It therefore comes down to extremely heavily optimised BFM - a 1% advantage built up manoeuvre after manoeuvre to produce an eventual victory after perhaps 10-15 minutes of combat, with both players safe in the knowledge that nobody is going to crash the party.

Many v Many is far more interesting IMO because everybody has to assume that their party is about to be crashed. This means that in addition to the obvious BFM fight, there is a continual battle for SA, with all of the participants trading time spent with their eyes on their target against time spent looking for as-yet unseen threats.

Additionally there is also teamwork to consider.

Throw in some ground targets and the game has become considerably more complex. Chess instead of draughts if you will.

What could be more chess like than working 10 to 15 minutes to slowly out maneuver and out think three dimensionally, your opponent ?

And with no squad support on Teamspeak to help save you if you screw up.

IMHO, a good duel with a Master level flier is much more dangerous than a good team oriented furball with mission objectives.

Viper2005_
06-15-2009, 02:05 PM
Obviously 1v1 is more dangerous than many v many because there is no reason for the combat not to be decisive if either pilot makes a mistake.

I don't think it's necessarily particularly interesting however, because 1v1 takes SA almost completely out of the picture.

If both pilots have the same aeroplane and fly it well, the end result generally seems to be an extended quasi-stable stalemate, followed by a sudden decisive phase brought on by very small performance differences.

A classic example would be one pilot running out of fuel a few seconds earlier than his opponent.

The shape of these guaranteed 1v1 fights tends to be very different from any fight with the potential to become many v many because there is no time pressure to finish the job before the enemy's mates turn up.

This means that guaranteed 1v1 fights often climb as the participants seek to build an energy advantage, whilst fights held "in the wild" tend to descend as the participants frantically try to obtain a decisive advantage or a disengagement opportunity before an un-seen enemy bounces the fight and kills them.

The simplicity of purpose associated with pure 1v1 makes it more akin to noughts & crosses than chess IMO. The uncertainty of a potentially many v many engagement, and the added pressure of ground objectives give more complete mission scenarios a strategic depth more akin to chess, sometimes complete with sacrificial diversionary raids, feints and traps.

deepo_HP
06-15-2009, 02:12 PM
Originally posted by jayhall0315:
What could be more chess like than working 10 to 15 minutes to slowly out maneuver and out think three dimensionally, your opponent ? sure, you have the same chess in mind?


Originally posted by jayhall0315:
a good duel with a Master level flier... that must be me! i can fly level for ages!!

BillSwagger
06-15-2009, 05:17 PM
I agree with Viper where there is more depth in a Many v Many scenario, and throwing in mission objectives adds to the complexity. If more pilots worked together then i could see this being a better chess match.
i still see 4 or 5 v 1 more often in online simming, which is probably due to the fact that most pilot/gamers go head on into battle with out first thinking, or they lack experience with a map.
But still, even seeing my own team mates huddled around 1 enemy is a bit frustrating.

The 1 v 1 is as much of a chess match, even though it involves much different techniques, and less depth than fighting in a full mission. Perhaps, Vipers point is that a 1 v 1 doesn't train you for a realistic encounter with in a real or simulated mission/combat environment.

If you adapted flight habits that might prove to be successful in 1v1, you could very well be a quick kill for someone in a many v many enviornment.

i still think there is much to gain in a 1v1 enviornment. Learning planes handling, etc...all thats been mentioned.

1v1 has its place, but i would also like to see 2v2, or 3v3.

Dare i suggest 2v2v2...

These situations are more complex and probably more inline with what you might encounter on a mission server.

I've even suggested a capture the flag type of event.

10 v 10.

The first team who has a plane that destroys a designated soft target, AND return to base. Wins.
If the target is detroyed, but the player doesn't/can't rtb, then they must hit another soft target and attempt to rtb.

Both teams would attempt this simultaneously.

OR they could trade off attempts, similar to volleyball. So if you stop their attack, it is your teams turn to attack and score on the designated soft target.

You throw in heavy AAA and it gets a bit tricky. If targets and teams are spread apart, bombers with escorts becomes necessary. While...front line fighters defend.

Seems like it could be a cool event if organized. still needs a bit more thought.

K_Freddie
06-15-2009, 05:44 PM
What's wrong with you dweebs..
All Muddy asked for was a one-vs-one.. so give him the opportunity to experience the thing. http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif
This is a good way of working out opposing a/c strengths, weaknesses, and tactics.
http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/10.gif

Muddy17
06-15-2009, 06:00 PM
BillSwagger is on to a good idea as well.
The thing I hate most about online is the 5 on 1 right after TO, shoot my *** down {LOL} then they all ***** at each other for kill stealing or sholder shooting. Sometimes is funny but mostly not really when they park there till there WD and have to rtb.

Bill a red flag or some other skills comp would be good.
At least save me from the drama online lol.

Gadje
06-15-2009, 07:06 PM
Interesting comments.

There are three differing dual scenarios I practice with online. 1v1, 2v2 and 6v6.

1v1 is all about precision flying. Any slight error, in choices made, or execution of them results in death when fighting v the best.
They can last a long time, however I find they are usually over quickly, even if the pilots are well matched because any slight mistake is pounced on by either.
1v1 is useless for SA training as was said. However IMO it is the best at teaching you the art of combat flying once you have decided to engage. Your plane control gets better and smoother quickly too.

2v2 revolves around tactics and teamwork. Getting full on engaged with one opponent even when you have an advantage is the hard way to do it.
Getting alt over your foes is the easiest way. Unlike 1v1 where you usually get shot going for an E advantage too early, with good teamwork you can potentialy get above them quite fast. Then its typical slashing low B'n'Z attack.

Comms and a regular teammate help alot http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif

6v6 is similar to 2v2. Full on engaging might win that one fight but you will probably be dead soon from another. So its get higher and the team above should win if planes are well matched.
Your SA skills get a real good workout here and your comm skills too. When done well I find in 6v6 I seldom have to check my six as often as usual as several friendly eyes are checking for me as I am in turn watching out for them. Real luxury that!

So all good practice and although teaching differing skills, between them, all worthy of time IMO. Definately not pointless if you want to get better as a fighter pilot.

Which is the most useful that I find I use in DF servers and coops?. The 1v1 skills. Its technique after all. Sadly however its the duel I enjoy the least of the 3 and the one you get rusty at the quickest.

Incidently my teammate Mikester hosts 6v6's from time to time on HL. Please feel free to join if you like. They are usually close and good fun.

S!

K_Freddie
06-15-2009, 07:26 PM
Yeah.. yeah.. heard it all before.. http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/blink.gif

Gadje
06-16-2009, 03:03 AM
Sorry Freddie feeling left out?

Go on! you can post your tracks of your your incredible moves in this thread too.

BillSwagger
06-16-2009, 06:14 AM
neat!!

thats the next step to not only kicking someones butt, but then making it public....

lol

Surely we have other reasons for playing in a duel.

Saburo_0
06-16-2009, 09:18 PM
Originally posted by Gadje:
Interesting comments.

There are three differing dual scenarios I practice with online. 1v1, 2v2 and 6v6.

1v1 is all about precision flying. Any slight error, in choices made, or execution of them results in death when fighting v the best.
They can last a long time, however I find they are usually over quickly, even if the pilots are well matched because any slight mistake is pounced on by either.
1v1 is useless for SA training as was said. However IMO it is the best at teaching you the art of combat flying once you have decided to engage. Your plane control gets better and smoother quickly too.

2v2 revolves around tactics and teamwork. Getting full on engaged with one opponent even when you have an advantage is the hard way to do it.
Getting alt over your foes is the easiest way. Unlike 1v1 where you usually get shot going for an E advantage too early, with good teamwork you can potentialy get above them quite fast. Then its typical slashing low B'n'Z attack.

Comms and a regular teammate help alot http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif

6v6 is similar to 2v2. Full on engaging might win that one fight but you will probably be dead soon from another. So its get higher and the team above should win if planes are well matched.
Your SA skills get a real good workout here and your comm skills too. When done well I find in 6v6 I seldom have to check my six as often as usual as several friendly eyes are checking for me as I am in turn watching out for them. Real luxury that!

So all good practice and although teaching differing skills, between them, all worthy of time IMO. Definately not pointless if you want to get better as a fighter pilot.

Which is the most useful that I find I use in DF servers and coops?. The 1v1 skills. Its technique after all. Sadly however its the duel I enjoy the least of the 3 and the one you get rusty at the quickest.

Incidently my teammate Mikester hosts 6v6's from time to time on HL. Please feel free to join if you like. They are usually close and good fun.

S!
Best post of this thread IMHO. Differing situations, teach a variety of lessons, all of which are fun, challenging and beneficial I think.